Kim/Trump Summit Disaster

[GMDino]

(03-01-2019, 12:06 PM)Dill Wrote:
Contradicting Trump, Otto Warmbier's parents blame North Korean leader Kim Jung Un for the death of their son
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/contradicting-trump-otto-warmbier-s-parents-blame-north-korean-leader-n978106

The parents of Otto Warmbier issued a blistering statement on Friday saying Kim Jong Un and his government "are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity" after President Donald Trump asserted that the North Korean dictator was unaware of the harrowing treatment the student endured while detained there.

"We have been respectful during this summit process. Now we must speak out. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for the death of our son Otto," Fred and Cindy Warmbier said in a blistering statement. "Kim and his evil regime are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity. No excuses or lavish praise can change that."

Warmbier's parents have a clear agenda here, and it involves respect for the memory of their son, what happened to him, who did it.

Who could have guessed?

[fredtoast]

(03-01-2019, 12:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: Who could have guessed?

Bfine certainly had his doubts.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-01-2019, 11:09 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Well said. The only people "disregarding the tragedy" are those who are making excuses for the President of the US believing a dictator in the matter of his nation torturing a US citizen or using outrage over his comments as a reason to engage in petty personal attacks for cheap online points.

Here's the thing about that.  First off, I will say that I sympathize with the man's family.  That being said, Trump lambasting Kim publicly over it will, a. not bring the guy back to life and b. damage further attempts at diplomacy.  Kim is used to zero criticism.  If he receives any he feeds people to dogs or straps them to an antiaircraft gun and then fires it.  I actually think Trump gave Kim a face saving way out of this.  I get that you don't think he deserves one, but I'd say a potential resolution of the North Korea problem is more important than holding Kim's feet to the fire in the press over this issue.

Lastly, and I know this will sound insensitive, but Warmbier made a series of dumb as hell decisions.  First, visiting North Korea at all is a huge gamble.  It's not like the regime's practices and intolerance are not well known qualities.  Then he commits a crime, giving them impunity to try him as a public spectacle and reinforce the ugly view of the US to their citizens.  Seriously, the guy went into a lion's cage and pulled its tail.  What happens next should surprise no one.

Am I saying he deserved what happened, absolutely not.  But if you take the extreme, and obvious risk of going to N. Korea you'd best be on your best behavior. 

[jj22]

(03-01-2019, 12:06 PM)Dill Wrote:
Contradicting Trump, Otto Warmbier's parents blame North Korean leader Kim Jung Un for the death of their son
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/contradicting-trump-otto-warmbier-s-parents-blame-north-korean-leader-n978106

The parents of Otto Warmbier issued a blistering statement on Friday saying Kim Jong Un and his government "are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity" after President Donald Trump asserted that the North Korean dictator was unaware of the harrowing treatment the student endured while detained there.

"We have been respectful during this summit process. Now we must speak out. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for the death of our son Otto," Fred and Cindy Warmbier said in a blistering statement. "Kim and his evil regime are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity. No excuses or lavish praise can change that."

Warmbier's parents have a clear agenda here, and it involves respect for the memory of their son, what happened to him, who did it.

It must have been sickening for them to hear Trump profess his love for Kim..... and of course Trump supporters in full defense of Kim. But if they paid attention to how Trump and his supporters embrace and love Putin and the Saudi King then this shouldn't be a surprise.

They thought they were special, but Republicans love taking advantage of parents who have suffered a loss for political gain. We see that with them turning on Otto, and we see that in the fact they haven't mentioned Benghazi or Stevens since 11/07/2016. Using these families work, but it doesn't make it right for Republicans to use that playbook as much as they do.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-01-2019, 11:06 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I will actually concede that the NK situation on the whole is slightly BETTER than when he first took office, at least on face value.  Haven't heard of any rockets getting shot over the peninsula into the pacific in some time.  How things go from here, who knows.  But I do prefer them not testing delivery systems.  I truly believe these meetings aggrandize Kim in NK and make for good propaganda, but I would be lying if I said that actually matters to me.  I really don't care all that much. 

When Daddy gets up there and proclaims to be the penultimate negotiator though, of coarse people are going to say he's failed when he walks away empty handed.  The penultimate negotiator would have gotten that thing signed right there.  He's not what he claims and thats what many, myself included, immediately attack.  The man is a wholesale POS, no matter what he does he can't change that fact.  He is his own greatest enemy.

This all falls back on my old argument here that I care more about what Trump does than what he says.  I appreciate that he is trying something different with North Korea and it's very possible that his walking away gets some results.  A different angle to view this at is that the US attempted a diplomatic solution and North Korea was not responsive.  How could that hurt as far as maintaining a coalition ready to impose sanctions on North Korea?

Getting anything done with North Korea is going to be a long, hard, slog.  If the end result is a permanent peace treaty and a denuclearized North Korea it will all be worth it.

[jj22]

(03-01-2019, 11:06 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I will actually concede that the NK situation on the whole is slightly BETTER than when he first took office, at least on face value.  Haven't heard of any rockets getting shot over the peninsula into the pacific in some time. 

There's no need to test anymore as he's got his nukes (under Trump's watch). He didn't have them under Obama so they were still threatening and shooting rockets.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/north-korea-believed-have-60-nuclear-weapons-south-korea-says-n915721

[fredtoast]

Here is what happened with the Trump lap dogs on this one.  The Warmbiers had high praise for Trump when he got there son returned, so the sycophants mistook them for the brainwashed type who will back Trump no matter what.  So they said there was no reason to be offended by Trumps remarks unless the family objected thinking that the parents would support Trump no matter what.  Now they're going to have to admit it was a shit move by Trump.

Or maybe they will claim "I never said that".

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-01-2019, 12:16 PM)jj22 Wrote: There's no need to test anymore as he's got his nukes (under Trump's watch). He didn't have them under Obama so they were still threatening and shooting rockets.

This statement is demonstrably false as a simple internets search would have shown you.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-timeline---fast-facts/index.html


2006
July - After North Korea test fires long range missiles, the UN Security Council passes a resolution demanding that North Korea suspend the program.

October - North Korea claims to have successfully tested its first nuclear weapon. The test prompts the UN Security Council to impose a broad array of sanctions.

2009
May 25 - North Korea announces it has conducted its second nuclear test.

June 12 - The UN Security Council condemns the nuclear test and imposes new sanctions.



Please do stop spreading falsehoods.  I sincerely hope that wasn't deliberate.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-01-2019, 12:06 PM)Dill Wrote:
Contradicting Trump, Otto Warmbier's parents blame North Korean leader Kim Jung Un for the death of their son
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/contradicting-trump-otto-warmbier-s-parents-blame-north-korean-leader-n978106

The parents of Otto Warmbier issued a blistering statement on Friday saying Kim Jong Un and his government "are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity" after President Donald Trump asserted that the North Korean dictator was unaware of the harrowing treatment the student endured while detained there.

"We have been respectful during this summit process. Now we must speak out. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for the death of our son Otto," Fred and Cindy Warmbier said in a blistering statement. "Kim and his evil regime are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity. No excuses or lavish praise can change that."

Warmbier's parents have a clear agenda here, and it involves respect for the memory of their son, what happened to him, who did it.

The problem is you can't call Kim out on it.  "Hey Kim if you didn't authorize this, then let's see the perpetrators punished." "Sure".  At which point Kim would grab a handful of guys and have them shot.  

[jj22]

This idea that Trump can't speak out against these things is lame.

Trump says Kim Jong Un didn’t know about brutalization of VA student Otto Warmbier. MBS had no knowledge of VA resident Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. Oh, and Putin had nothing to do with 2016 election interference...

No American president has been so scared to speak out against brutal regimes. So why is it excusable now? Would these same people excuse Hillary if she professed her love for Putin and Kim? Exactly.

[GMDino]

(03-01-2019, 12:32 PM)jj22 Wrote: This idea that Trump can't speak out against these things is lame.

Trump says Kim Jong Un didn’t know about brutalization of VA student Otto Warmbier. MBS had no knowledge of VA resident Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. Oh, and Putin had nothing to do with 2016 election interference...

No American president has been so scared to speak out against brutal regimes. So why is it excusable now? Would these same people excuse Hillary if she professed her love for Putin and Kim? Exactly.

And he DID speak out...strongly.  And everyone agreed. Not that Warmbier made a smart move going there in the first place or whatever led to his being imprisoned...but that Kim should be held responsible.

Then he started making promises about deals that he can't/couldn't make.

So he's trapped.  He has to try and "play nice" and hope that flattery works with Kim like it does on himself.  ("Beautiful letters" that Kim wrote to him and all that jazz.)

[Vas Deferens]

(03-01-2019, 12:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the thing about that.  First off, I will say that I sympathize with the man's family.  That being said, Trump lambasting Kim publicly over it will, a. not bring the guy back to life and b. damage further attempts at diplomacy.  Kim is used to zero criticism.  If he receives any he feeds people to dogs or straps them to an antiaircraft gun and then fires it.  I actually think Trump gave Kim a face saving way out of this.  I get that you don't think he deserves one, but I'd say a potential resolution of the North Korea problem is more important than holding Kim's feet to the fire in the press over this issue.

Lastly, and I know this will sound insensitive, but Warmbier made a series of dumb as hell decisions.  First, visiting North Korea at all is a huge gamble.  It's not like the regime's practices and intolerance are not well known qualities.  Then he commits a crime, giving them impunity to try him as a public spectacle and reinforce the ugly view of the US to their citizens.  Seriously, the guy went into a lion's cage and pulled its tail.  What happens next should surprise no one.

Am I saying he deserved what happened, absolutely not.  But if you take the extreme, and obvious risk of going to N. Korea you'd best be on your best behavior. 

I have to agree with a lot of this.  

Edit* That being said, Daddy saying he 'takes his word that he didn't know' is a weak ass move. Daddy looks like a ***** all too often.

[fredtoast]

(03-01-2019, 12:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: The problem is you can't call Kim out on it.  "Hey Kim if you didn't authorize this, then let's see the perpetrators punished." "Sure".  At which point Kim would grab a handful of guys and have them shot.  

Then why is it okay to call Kim a "maniac" and a "bad dude" and "rocketman" and "a madman", and threaten him with "fire and fury like the world has never seen"?

This is the biggest problem I have with the way Trump has handled NK.  He has made it clear that there is no need for any world leader to believe any threat he makes.  It is obvious that he just talks shit and has no clue what he should do.

And before anyone calls me on it, I criticized Obama for not following through with his "red line" remarks about chemical weapons in Syria.  He didn't go so far as to suck up to Assad and act like they were buddies, but he still failed

[Belsnickel]

(03-01-2019, 12:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the thing about that.  First off, I will say that I sympathize with the man's family.  That being said, Trump lambasting Kim publicly over it will, a. not bring the guy back to life and b. damage further attempts at diplomacy.  Kim is used to zero criticism.  If he receives any he feeds people to dogs or straps them to an antiaircraft gun and then fires it.  I actually think Trump gave Kim a face saving way out of this.  I get that you don't think he deserves one, but I'd say a potential resolution of the North Korea problem is more important than holding Kim's feet to the fire in the press over this issue.

Lastly, and I know this will sound insensitive, but Warmbier made a series of dumb as hell decisions.  First, visiting North Korea at all is a huge gamble.  It's not like the regime's practices and intolerance are not well known qualities.  Then he commits a crime, giving them impunity to try him as a public spectacle and reinforce the ugly view of the US to their citizens.  Seriously, the guy went into a lion's cage and pulled its tail.  What happens next should surprise no one.

Am I saying he deserved what happened, absolutely not.  But if you take the extreme, and obvious risk of going to N. Korea you'd best be on your best behavior. 

I'm with Vas Deferens on this one in that I mostly agree, but I have an issue. I agree that calling him out on it, especially in public, would not be good, but saying what he did is too far in the other direction. Just my feeling on that.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-01-2019, 12:57 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I have to agree with a lot of this.  

Edit*  That being said, Daddy saying he 'takes his word that he didn't know' is a weak ass move.  Daddy looks like a ***** all too often.

(03-01-2019, 02:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm with Vas Deferens on this one in that I mostly agree, but I have an issue. I agree that calling him out on it, especially in public, would not be good, but saying what he did is too far in the other direction. Just my feeling on that.

I'll be honest, I expected that post to get a lot of blowback, I'm pleased to see the logic of it was considered and not the potential visceral reaction or interpretation of victim blaming.  As to the last point, I agree Trump should not have put his acceptance of Kim's denial in such effusive terms.

[GMDino]

(03-01-2019, 01:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then why is it okay to call Kim a "maniac" and a "bad dude" and "rocketman" and "a madman", and threaten him with "fire and fury like the world has never seen"?

This is the biggest problem I have with the way Trump has handled NK.  He has made it clear that there is no need for any world leader to believe any threat he makes.  It is obvious that he just talks shit and has no clue what he should do.

And before anyone calls me on it, I criticized Obama for not following through with his "red line" remarks about chemical weapons in Syria.  He didn't go so far as to suck up to Assad and act like they were buddies, but he still failed

Like when DJT says if it were not for him we would be at war with NK.  Well, yeah, HE threatened it ("My button is much bigger!").  So in way he's right that if it weren't for him just being a blowhard (thank goodness) we'd be at war with NK.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-01-2019, 01:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then why is it okay to call Kim a "maniac" and a "bad dude" and "rocketman" and "a madman", and threaten him with "fire and fury like the world has never seen"?

This is the biggest problem I have with the way Trump has handled NK.  He has made it clear that there is no need for any world leader to believe any threat he makes.  It is obvious that he just talks shit and has no clue what he should do.

And before anyone calls me on it, I criticized Obama for not following through with his "red line" remarks about chemical weapons in Syria.  He didn't go so far as to suck up to Assad and act like they were buddies, but he still failed

I think you misunderstood me.  

[Vas Deferens]

(03-01-2019, 02:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll be honest, I expected that post to get a lot of blowback, I'm pleased to see the logic of it was considered and not the potential visceral reaction or interpretation of victim blaming.  As to the last point, I agree Trump should not have put his acceptance of Kim's denial in such effusive terms.

Yeah.  I don't see any reason to go to NK really, just nothing there of interest to me from what i can tell.  I wouldn't mind going to mogidishu to see some of the historical sites and supposed great beaches there; but I sure as hell won't whistle my fat american white ass brazenly into the slums with an expensive camera around my dumb neck.  Still don't get the excuse of 'my church made me do it'.  Pretty stupid on multiple levels in that case.  

[Dill]

(03-01-2019, 03:10 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Yeah.  I don't see any reason to go to NK really, just nothing there of interest to me from what i can tell.  I wouldn't mind going to mogidishu to see some of the historical sites and supposed great beaches there; but I sure as hell won't whistle my fat american white ass brazenly into the slums with an expensive camera around my dumb neck.  Still don't get the excuse of 'my church made me do it'.  Pretty stupid on multiple levels in that case.  

I'd love to go there and travel the country observing.  I would not, though, because of the risk. 

Every American there is a potential bargaining chip. If needed, s/he will be arrested. 

Three or four returned Americans could be traded for canceling another round of military exercises. 

[Dill]

(03-01-2019, 02:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll be honest, I expected that post to get a lot of blowback, I'm pleased to see the logic of it was considered and not the potential visceral reaction or interpretation of victim blaming.  As to the last point, I agree Trump should not have put his acceptance of Kim's denial in such effusive terms.

I had several points of oblique disagreement with your post. I am busy working on a response to your previous, well-thought-out evaluation of Trump's diplomacy, but will take time for a few comments on this one.
 
Trump's options at the summit were more in number than "lambasting" Kim or claiming to believe him. But there is no evidence in this or past summits that Trump can recognize and utilize the range of options available to him when put on the spot.  

You've agreed T did not need to be "effusive." I add that this effusiveness, the claim to believe Kim, also has diplomatic repercussions, as US allies will continue to question Trump's judgment--the most important factor in keeping his (and the nation's) credibility, which they need to continue working with us. One can only speculate what North and South Koreans make of a U.S. president confirming Kim's lies/propaganda at a summit like this. Everyone but Trump knows quite well that Kim monitors the status of every American bargaining chip grabbed in North Korea. Each one is part of a calculation in future diplomacy. I doubt much that saving face for Kim at a critical moment has "kept diplomacy alive" or some such. 

There is a prior problem anyway, in that there should not have been a summit, no place for questions like that to be posed amidst diplomacy aimed at reducing a nuclear threat. This is really a series of mistakes, as I'll be discussing shortly.